NEWS: We Need New Democrats, These Ones DonÂ’t Work

POLITICS: We Need New Democrats, These Ones Don’t Work

I would like to think otherwise, but a strong case can now be made that the Democrats are not stopping the Iraq war because they know it will kill any chance the Republicans have to keep the White House next year. What the Democrats are doing if far more sickening than the Republicans. They are stretching this war out for political advantage.

Nancy Pelosi and Rohm Emanuel appeared on two different shows this weekend. Both made the same bullshit points. First, Pelosi appeared on CNN.

Absolute horseshit. Stopping the Iraq war has nothing to do with voting, it can be accomplished by doing nothing. Democrats can end the war by NOT bring up a funding bill. Then funding ends and the war ends. Thankfully, Blitzer calls Pelosi on her bullshit.

Yes, you certainly could do that. And wouldn’t that be horrible, if you forced the Republicans to do something they don’t want to do? My God, it might actually seem like you were a politician doing your job. But, you wouldn’t want to try every avenue available to you to “"Bring the war to an end" as you assholes said in the run up to the 2006 elections.

Pelosi is referring to a motion to recommit when she speaks of “Parliamentary prerogative.” The motion to recommit is the prerogative of the minority and the majority doesn't see the motion until it’s made (or just before it's made). This is how the Republicans brought the MoveOn amendment to the floor in the Senate. If the majority really was against the bill they could filibuster. Taking this road would undermine cynics like myself, who believe Democrats don’t really care all that much about ending the war. But the Democrats are proving to be an amazing group of pussies.

Later Pelosi is asked why the Democrats are not sending bills about withdrawal timetables to the president.

The fuck it is. The Democrats took office on the promise of ending the war. So, what happened? MORE soldiers were sent to Iraq. The war was expanded. Fuck off, Nancy. This is both parties war now. That is why Congressional approval rates are at 11%.

Thanks for the hearings, I feel much better. Keep up the good work. If all goes well, you will hearing the shit out of this war. The next Democrat asshole to spew this crap from his mouth was Rahm Emanuel on Real Time with Bill Maher.

Uh, yeah itÂ’s exactly a way to get them out of there. Do you think wars end by continuing to fund them? IÂ’m going to go ahead and make the bold and daring statement that when ending a war, funding decreases. They actually cost almost nothing if you are not fighting one. And if you take away funding, it does not mean you just leave the troops in the desert. We would actually probably know how to bring them back. I know this because I am not retarded.

Rahm continued to ramble about how we need proper armor for Humvees and Kevlar vests, and that is why we need to fund the soldiers. Can't disagree with that. Of course it has nothing to do with continuing to fund that war. We get that the money in part goes to arm the troops. We didnÂ’t think it went to build a pretty boat in Florida.

Then Rahm gets to the heart of the matter.

Ah, yes. We need a Democratic President. There is the end game.

Then do it, fuckface. Because right now, you arenÂ’t doing everything in your power to make it happen and that is what the American people expected when they gave you control of Congress.

That is about the best you can get with the current system. Democracy and the power of the people to truly get honest representation has been dead for a long time now. Corporate interests and other demons run the show...

I am beginning to question whether there are there any trustworthy leaders in America that will actually do the things that the American people vote them into office for.

But maybe I should have started to ask myself this a long time ago.

Democrats : stealthy, apathetic, blaming blullshitters
Republicans : upfront bullshitters

you still end up with bulllshit

They are all con artists....None of them give a damn about us, and none of them can understand what it's like to actually have to work to get paid

My thoughts exactly!

I agree the war is politically advantageous for Democrats. Unfortunately, I have a feeling that a Democrat President will not end the war abruptly either; once he/she takes office, they won't want to appear in the eyes of the nation (or world for that matter) as being the one who ultimately "lost" the war, or left the Iraqi's high and dry.

What's even more unfortunate is that defunding the war won't ultimately end it either. I think George will still leave the troops there and point fingers at the Dems.

Well, that's easy to solve. Fund troops withdrawal and impeach.

I got to play devil's advocate here. Say we withdraw and the inevitable happens and total chaos breaks out in Iraq again. Journalists go in and show the American people horrifying pictures of the suffering people and suddenly it was a terrible thing to do a troop withdraw and anybody associated with it burns forever in the hell of lost elections. Iraq scenarios of what might happen if or when we do this...[insert here] have politicians in both parties scared shitless.

Bingo.

What I don't understand is if they refuse to impeach, or censure, or remove, because they don't have the votes. Why don't they just not give him money until he does what they want? How is he going to go on vacation to crawford if the congress refuses to pay for the gas for air force one?
They shouldn't even give the white house money to pay the electric bill. Refuse to give the machinations of the white house any ability to function until they cede power.

That has always been the only way for a parliament to take power back from a king.

But that would require a congress that wasn't spineless.

worked for Johnson, didn't it?

What I can't stand is the way these politicians get on TV, flab their mouths about this or that.....and NEVER ANSWER A QUESTION! At some point, someone has gotta slap one of these assholes silly..(either party)..and let them know that not everyone in the world is stupid. Just because the vast majority of media outlets report what politicians say as news without doing the research and reporting to determine if what is said is true or not, doesn't mean that Americans buy it.

Kudos to Maher (whom I normally loathe) for calling the man on it.

Isn't anyone else sick to death of the Dems always trying to make the Republicans look bad? And the Republicans trying to make the Dems look bad? Never realizing that they've both created an environment where neither side can just do what's best for the country, because both sides want exclusive credit for the good...and none for the bad.

Well, then by all means, don't try.

First, i think it's cute, this idea of journalists "going in."

Second, uh huh. That is pretty much going to happen. Whether it happens now or in 10 years, it's going to happen. This was set in motion when Bush invaded and removed Saddam. There will be no stopping it, as a matter of fact a solid argument can be made that by keeping our troops in Iraq, we are allowing the civil war to worsen by being a buffer. The politicians have zero incentive to work things out, so the country remains in a stalemate and violence is the only answer.

Here are the only two solutions: Start a draft and send in 700,000 troops or end it. What we are doing now is bullshit and a total waste of American lives.

democrats are just inbetweeners that take all the blame and balance the budget for the next republican dictatorship to come in a rape us for a few more terms in office.... while we sit here complaining about bullshit opinions force fed to us by the media, they run our lives...tell us what to do and make s as in debt and guilty as them...so in the end the american dream and the figment of what they call our collective way of life...will simply be massive credit card debt, a broken homes, and bank forclosures. The sad part is anyone working in a shopping mall has the know how to run this country...you just choose not to.....

and by the by...... every military contracter and company involved in usurping the natural resources of Iraq has their own army. We dont need to mask them with our troops anymore or patrol their perimitters or let our countries name be involved in another corporate war...especially since it is entirely funded by our tax dollars and we won't see a dime for it.

Won't work. Been tried before. Thing is as a government paycheck receiving military member I get panicked when they don't fund the military again for another year...I got bills man. It doesn't ever impact the Whitehouse but it does get a lot of servicemembers pissed off...and trust me you don't piss off the guys with all the guns.

The draft thing is funny, it won't happen...pisses off too many of the voting public, and congress has made it harder to actually pass a draft bill (selective service be damned). The only option is to pull out, which of course screws everybody in Iraq, with no American presence the various factions presently seeking control will make the people's lives a living hell when they can at each other without having to worry about Team America. Sucks, but seriously we should have never got involved. As far as "journalist going in" sure it happens (no often), but it does happen or we wouldn't get those nice shocking images from the Sudan from time to time....

This just further cements all the reasons why I don't vote. It doesn't matter who goes into office, whether it's for congress or for the President. There are a lot of people and interests more important to the people in office than what the majority of the American people want, and they all have lots of money to funnel into their bank accounts.

Until we can effectively remove or curb lobbyists, special interest groups, and fucked up political campaign donations, it really amounts to a big performance every few years.

These 700,000 troops that we draft, is there a plan for them or do we just sort of send them there to sit on their thumbs? Or should I assume that because you posed this as an end all be all solution that you have a clear and concise plan but didn't want to include it because it was too much to type? Or, since typing clearly isn't a problem, you thought it was too obvious to bother with? Let's just pretend that your plan is more coherent and viable than the Bush Administration's plan.

So, we draft these troops, fair enough. Should they all be combat arms types? How long do you suppose it would take to train them all and get them in theater? Ignoring the obvious logistical issues, like massively increasing the training capacity of the military's depots and such, do we lower the recruiting standards to speed up the process, which can surely take no more than a couple of weeks anyway? What about all the weapons and armor and equipment we'd have to build to support this huge draft? Again, probably no more than a couple of weeks. Say we do this sort of thing, and send 700,000 conscripted soldiers with shortened training times and inferior equipment, all to fulfill the FTR Plan, do we then get to read your posts lamenting over the 10 fold increase in US and Iraqi civilian casualties? Because, you know, lower trained soldiers means more accidents on top of lower combat effectiveness and unit cohesion.

But by all means, let's draft 700,00 troops! Or just end it. Either way.

But to address your second point, I think we should simply leave the country in a matter of a few days and let 'em fight it out, since we're acting the buffer and all. Hell, leave our equipment there too to help expedite both our exit and their killing of each other. Then, the strongest/most ruthless will survive and stabilize the country. But after that, they might be angry at us since we went ahead and left them (see Afghanistan c. 1991) and have incentive to use the weapons we left on us. Further, since our vacating of premises caused a genocidal civil war, we can count on the rest of the world being extremely pleased with us too.

I like it. Let's do it.

How many people know about the National Initiative for Democracy? It's a "proposed law developed by The Democracy Foundation, over the past decade, along with a plan to get it enacted by the people (not by the government) creating, for the first time, a government 'by you, the people.'" This is something Democratic presidential candidate Mike Gravel has been promoting (he doesn't have a ghost of a chance at winning the Democratic Party nomination since he is one of the few candidates with the chutzpah to speak truth to power). I don't know how it might ever be implemented if it got the requisite 50 million votes to ostensibly become law (I'm guessing our federal court system would find it unconstitutional since it would effectively threaten the status quo of corporate oligarchy).

So, let me get this right: If we elected Democrats to office in the legislature in an act of faith that they would end the war, and they didn't do that (nor did they make every tactical effort to do so), we are supposed to trust that electing a Democrat to the office of President will somehow obligate him/her to honor his/her commitment? Umm, yeah right...

I'm so sick of these 'say-one-thing-and-do-another' politicians. And sick of the misinformed, gullible and complacent citizens who continue to support them by voting for them.

When will it end?...

current dems are pussies.

but wait. weren't they all ways?

where have you people been the last 50 years?

all politicians are con artists spinning the same way of things with different words and plans, all to make banks rich, and us their slaves.

it never changes..

Yep, that's the first think that comes to my mind when I read about the Cuban Missile Crisis: "That JFK, what a pussy!"

One reason you can't just shut off funding is logistics. As of Sept. 2007 acording to AP there are approx 160,000 troops in Iraq. Moving all troops and equipment out while being shot at isn't easy. I know I'm being a smart ass but you don't just wake up one morning and yell "get on the bus." A general told me this past fall it would take at least two years to do. You have to keep funding the troops while the pull out is happening. No funds, no food, no bullets. Shut off funds and it'll end the war all right but you'll get a lot of dead or starving troops.

If you want this thing over contact and put pressure on your representatives in Washington and vote. I'm in the military and I've done both.

What have you done?

The President would almost certainly invoke the "Feed And Forage Act" before that happened, which is one of the reasons why "Just don't approve any funding and the war ends" isn't as simple a solution as it sounds.